I think that speeding well in excess of the limit is the only thing that they can prove in traffic court. It seems to me that everything else would come down to

I think that speeding well in excess of the limit is the only thing that they can prove in traffic court. It seems to me that everything else would come down to the cop's story vs. the defendant's story. Or they get lucky and find that someone's erratic driving is due to being under-the-influence, which is also easy to to prove. If anyone can explain how enforcement of distracted driving laws is supposed to work, I'm curious.